A DRUG dealer who sold ecstasy tablets to a teenager before she was killed in a car crash must pay back £67,457 - or face jail for two years.

James Roddy's activities netted him more than £80,000 over six years, York Crown Court heard.

Now the state will strip the 49-year-old of his house, car, money schemes for his retirement, and anything else of value.

If he fails to pay back the cash within six months, he could be brought back to court and sentenced to a two-year prison term.

Roddy, of Germain Road, Selby, sold tragic teenager Clare Smith ten tablets only hours before her death on September 13, 1999, as her boyfriend Lee Randell, then 19, drove her home after taking ecstasy and cannabis.

But after serving a 30-month sentence he carried on selling drugs and was caught with more than £600 of cannabis in November, 2004.

Roddy admitted possession with intent to supply and was ordered to do 150 hours' community punishment.

Police finance expert Mike Sankey investigated his money affairs from November, 1998, to his arrest in November, 2004, and discovered £82,643 that could not be legally accounted for.

It included £40,870 paid mostly in cash into his two bank accounts.

Roddy also received £9,628 in dole money while making mortgage and credit card applications by lying that he was a car dealer earning £30,000 a year. He did not pay any income tax during the six years.

Mr Sankey said Roddy owned assets worth £67,457, including £43,694 equity in his house, a Peugeot 406, pension schemes and bank accounts.

Roddy's barrister John Dunning said the money in his bank account came from buying and selling items legally and from gambling.

The defendant claimed his brother Michael Roddy and nephew Stephen Roddy had put up a deposit for his house and each paid a third of his mortgage.

But Judge Paul Hoffman, making the confiscation order, said: "The only legitimate income that Mr Sankey could verify was £9,500 in benefits and something over £2,000 in odd jobs and credit has been given in respect of both of these.

"The defendant has absolutely no records and nor do his witnesses for that matter.

"Though he claimed he made a living buying and selling he can't name any single purchaser of his goods during the relevant time."

He added there was not "a shred of written evidence", including any formal documents or bank account payments, to suggest either of the relatives "had an interest in the house."

Updated: 09:59 Wednesday, February 15, 2006